Online Community of Zenith Builders and Flyers
I started a similar discussion on FB and received a great deal of contradictory information. I am very familiar with the O-200, having hundreds of hours behind it in my C150M I owned for many years. Aside from weight, the O-200 seems a much simpler approach. Rotax has limited overhaul facilities to 3 in the US according to California Power Systems. Likewise, overhaul parts are monopolized. No such case the the O-200. Parts appear readily available, and any A&P can overhaul the engine (including me, as a CH701 builder) There are many O-200's in various conditions on the market, and enough parts on Ebay to essentially build one from scratch. Thus I am leaning toward the O-200 and would like input from those that have gone the same route, and how the extra weight was dealt with.
Fully agree with you. I had that type engine in my 150 for 20 years. It never missed a heartbeat. Never had anything to worry about. Reliability and safety is proven. That's what I am putting in my CH650. I have nothing against the 912. Good engine. From memory the TBO is about half the O200. The core is turning more than twice faster than the O200 for the same HP (or about). What I really like about the O200 it is that anywhere you land - there is someone who can help you. Again nothing against the 912. Is a good engine but I would not be familiar enough on it to fix it myself.
Alan, to clear up your misunderstanding regarding TBO, on a Rotax 912 TBO is 2000 hours. Many engines have gone much longer on a conditional basis. TBO on 0-200 is 1800 or 2000 hours, depending upon the model.
Thanks Alan....indeed the O-200 is tried and true, and Im not particularly found of Rotax's death grip on overhauls and parts. Just spent some time on Ebay and found enough yellow tagged parts to build an fresh O-200 for well under 10K. Is the extra weight of the O-200 an issue with the CH650....that is the most frequent objection I have heard vs the 912 on the 701.
Hi Jim, I built a 1st edition ch750 with a o-200. It now has over 1000 hrs on it. Weight savings were, lightweight starter, alt.
Whirlwind prop and Odyssey PC680 battery, empty weight was 816 lbs. Since then I replaced the Odyssey with a Earth-ex
for a savings of 10 lbs on the firewall. I took the slats off, saving another 14 lbs, added shoulder harness + 4lbs, larger tires
= more weight. Empty weight is now 808 lbs. I am quite happy with it now.
But by removing the SLATs, it's no longer the same aircraft.
Any issues with maintaining the CG given the extra weight of the O-200 ?
having installed an O-200D, It certainly provides the most power for weight than at other version especially with 30A lightweight alternator. This is the strongest, best balanced, smoothest O200 I've ever been behind.
And most importantly as former professional airman, I feel more confident than ANY other competitor in the class, including auto conversions
Any issues maintaining the CG given the extra weight of the O-200 over the 912. ?? I plan on using a SkyTech starter and B&C alternator.
I had previous corvair, about 225 installed, C G was not an issue after change or before: as I have battery aft of seats and still well in range. But now have much less "heavy nose feeling"
Which 30A alternator? Trying to decide if I really want to junk my old functioning alternator to save a few pounds.